Horowitz Hearing Filled with Bogus “No Bias” BS

Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | December 11, 2019 | Rush Limbaugh

[Widget Jr]

“Intent” is a red herring here, because intent is not necessary to prove someone committed a crime.

[Phillyred]

Exactly. This was an attempted election theft and later coup.

[odawg]

I wonder why no one is questioning why Horowitz ever brought up the “no bias” BS in the first place. It was uncalled for, useless, a waste of time. The emphasis in an investigation is to determine the facts of the case, not what the perps had on their minds while committing criminality.

It is obviously meant to steer the public mind into a narrow chute that guides their thinking along the lines of “mistakes were made” but their hearts were in the right place.

[patriotfury]

Wow, people are really getting sucked into and wrapped around the highly intentional and false “INTENT” argument.

Having worked with OIG investigations in a few places, as has been stated many times, it is an IG’s duty to identify various violations of law and agency regulation, as well as to identify those who were in violation.

Those who have violated law and regulation, are then referred for whatever comes next.

*Intent is NOT an IG criteria. They may identify obvious motive in a criminal referral, but “motive/intent” simply does not determine if crime or violations of law have taken place.

Intent (motive) becomes relevant, when determining both scope and judgement.

What we are witnessing now, is a full court effort by the highly motivated, truly guilty, “deep state”, to cause the masses to believe actual crimes were not committed, because there was *NO INTENT*.

It is obvious the Horowitz IG report was carefully/specifically scripted, so as to pervay a false “INTENT” argument.

This is in itself, whether or not “INTENT” existed, is fundamentally NOT his job, and does not determine if violations of law were committed. This is stupid.

The average American trying to follow this, now probably thinks it is.

Additionally, the fact that Horowitz knew, and was very careful not to disclose known information, as to the false HRC/DNC/FGPS purchased Kremlin ops “dossier” information origin, also allowed Horowitz the room to then reinforce the grossly false narrative of “NO BIAS”.

I believe, in this critical national case, Horowitz knew he had to go well out of his way (lane) to sculpt or create a NO BIAS/NO INTENT/NO MOTIVE argument conclusion, and that his “conclusion” needed to both — try and shield the near myriad illegal acts and actors, from possible findings of sedition and actual treason, AND to thwart, slow down, and throw cold water on, or to dissuade the trying to find justice.

ALSO, as we saw today, his insurgent report talking points were purely made to be left wing talking points, which in itself demonstrates Horowitz’s highly political bias, and his effort (his real motive) to protect the flagrantly lawless on the side he is clearly a part.

[mosesdapoet]

Something to consider
When the God fearing founders of this nation came up with the Republican vs democratic form of governmental representation. They considered that groups we call political partys once elected to a given political office. Could place their groups control and interest above the common good and benefit of the nation once elected to a legislative, executive or judicial office. Rather than work together for the common interest.

They truly believed that upon election. requiring taking the oath of office which swears loyalty to abide and support the constitution would take precedence and avert any fractious direction super ceding any political position taken by the group that the office holder associated with before entering .It took the democrat convention of 2012 when they attempted to remove any reference to God, “Our Creator,” to clearly demonstrate that belief no longer applied and when one took that oath it meant nothing.